KJK and the neo-nazis video

[niandraladesand]

Just wondering if anyone here has seen this yet and what you think of it

What's been debunked is that KJK organised the Nazi salute, or deliberately arranged for then to be there. Which was obviously not true.

What still stands, however, is that KJK is marketing herself to the far right (e.g. by going on their shows - a verifiable fact) and refusing to say people like Hearts of Oak are not welcome.

So, it's not a surprise these people turn up.

And KJK aligned herself with the religious right by collaborating with CPAC. CPACs logo appeared on her publicity and they say they gave her money.

Do you know anything about CPAC and why associating with them is such a bad idea?

Since I got involved with this issue (many years ago now), we have been accused if being funded / in league with the Religious Right. This was total bollocks. Or, used to be.

CPAC is well funded, anti- women's rights and the very definition of the religious right. Their followers include alt-right misogynists, racists, forced birthers, homophobes and nutty conspiracy theorists.

Why on earth would any self respecting women"s rights campaigner want anything to do with them?

And why, when we come under fire - wrongly - for associating with / accepting money from the religious right would anyone in their right mind go and make this lie true? What the fuck us she playing at?

“Do you know anything about CPAC”

CPAC Australia you mean?

The CPAC Australia with Warren Mundine as chairman? The ex-National Australian Labour Party chairman and MP?

And one of the speakers from last year’s event was Mark Latham? You know, the ex- ALP leader who took Labour to a federal election and lost?

It is remarkable the roots of the people involved isn’t it?

What still stands, however, is that KJK is marketing herself to the far right (e.g. by going on their shows - a verifiable fact) and refusing to say people like Hearts of Oak are not welcome.

People really, really, really, really and I mean, really do have an issue with other people's rights and freedoms of association, don't they?

In a public space, anyone can talk.

On an internet forum, anyone can join.

You people who keep saying 'Goodie Keen associated with/collaborating with/marketing to' really need to get your heads around the fact that you do not own people and they are free to do what they want and you are free to do what you want.

Don't want to have Hearts of Oak at open events, then sell your own tickets to your own event and ask people if they are from Hearts of Oak on the application forms. Show us all how easy it is to get Left Wing coverage or Left Wing organisations to cover your insurance...By Left Wing of course I mean PURE and HONEST.

Indeed. And if you want people to believe them when they say they've given her money, it's probably better to not call them nutty conspiracy theorists in the same post 😄

The phrase far right just makes me think of Gary Larson's Far side cartoons now.

Has anyone seen confirmation that CPAC did anything more than pay for printed material organised by the NSW Standing for Women organisers?

Did KJK have any say in that print run?

Negative.

So this is another allegation based on supposition and someone’s false conclusions?

And the chairman of CPAC Australia is ex national chair of the Australian Labor Party, plus a respected indigenous advisor….

OMG I never understood till now. Thanks for the enlightenment, Steph. Conclusive proof 😂

KJK is marketing herself to the far right (e.g. by going on their shows - a verifiable fact)

Hard to believe that this is still being put forward as evidence.

It is true that she has gone on shows that are right wing, and for instance Julie Bindel has had article published by the Daily Mail.

This is because the left / liberal media is censoring women who speak up for women's sex based rights.

I suspect both KJK and JB would be only too glad to have the offer from other platforms / print media to talk / write about their views which each hold very strongly.

So yet again the problem is that the left / liberal platforms are not open to free speech, and specifically banning women who have their own opinions.

Strange isn't it that yet again when the real problem is partiarchal power, that this never gets called out. Somehow it is always women's fault.

Sad that on a forum like FWR, there are women who are saying women are the cause of their own downfall. Never ever look beyond the immediate superficial reality, of men controlling who is given a voice and who isn't.

Blame the victim.

I am happy to say that the OP and all who push the same outright lies have been owned by KJK.

Best outcome possible - and I hope it helps Moira Deeming and Angie Jones take down all those who smeared them and cost them so dearly.

I won’t hold my breath waiting for the disingenuous, pathetic, ignorant arses who gleefully spread the desperate Nazi lies to retract, apologise and learn from this….

KJK - vindicated 💐, along with all those in Australia who have been so viciously targeted. ☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️

What's been debunked is that KJK organised the Nazi salute, or deliberately arranged for then to be there. Which was obviously not true.

You got this bit right. And then go on to talk utter bollocks.
KJK lets women speak. Sometimes the womans speaks a lot of sense, somtimes they ramble and you wonder why they are trying to say. KJK doesn't know what they are going to say, she just wants to let them have their say and get heard. KJK letting them speak doesn't mean she endorses what they say. She's literally just letting them speak.
And by exactly the same logic KJK using any platform available to her does not mean KJK agrees with or endorses every view expressed by anyone ever on that platform.
You sound like a flat earth conspiracy theorist with your CPAC money stuff. KJK just wants women's voices to be heard and she will go on media channels from across the whole political spectrum to get her message out. That doesn't mean she endorses any of their views, it just means that she's spreading her word far and wide.
There seems to be this view that she should only go on "approved" media outlets, and only talk with "approved" people. Only the "approved" media outlets don't approve of what she has to say, and don't want her to have any say at all. KJK rejects this and talks to whoever she likes. That's why we are talking about KJK and know who she is, because she's getting her message out. If she only did what others approved of we wouldn't be talking about her right now, because we wouldn't know who she was. You may as well be trying to tell her to shut the fuck up when you come out with the conspracy funding bollocks. And you know what she won't. KJK will keep spreading her message wherever she pleases to anyone who will listen as far and wide as she can on any platform that will have her regardless of percieved political leaning. KJK is getting heard by a huge number of people, some of who she agrees with and many of who she disagrees with, but she's getting heard by all of them. Trying to police who she speaks with and what audiences hear her views is utterly pointless because she doesn't give a fuck about crackpot conspiracy theorists, she's too busy getting her message out to everyone. She's very effective in speaking to as many people as possible. We know how effective she is by the amount of people trying to smear her, the dirty guilt by association tactics being used to try and shut her up. The clear panic in those who want her to shut her up. The attempts to link her to nazis etc.... all of this is just useful idiots panicing trying to get her to shut up. And she won't, and she never loses :)

I'm surprised that MN is letting some of the defamatory stuff on this thread stand, tbh, especially given that MN doesn't allow her a right of reply on this site, and that KJK has shown that she can and will successfully bring legal action against those who defame her. It's an interesting moderating decision given the amount of deletions that happen elsewhere on the board(s).

This.

I think you can see a difference here. MN FWR posters will argue their point, and leave the bunk posts up (to enpeaken les autres).

Whereas the TRA monitors will instead complain and get posts removed.

MN knows this is defamatory false information with malicious intent.

it’s still up.

KJK - will be vindicated 💐 again.

These days, the word 'aligned' is my cue to switch off and not take another word that person says remotely seriously.

It's lazy, ideological left vs. right thinking, and yet another instance of TRAs' tedious strategy of forced teaming.

Seen it all before. Only nowadays, the proliferation of the scissors icon is interesting in these contexts. Apparently plenty of LGB people don't like the forced teaming, either.

It is true that she has gone on shows that are right wing, and for instance Julie Bindel has had article published by the Daily Mail

JFC, for the millionth time, this isn't about the right wing, as in the Tories.

This is about the far right as in white supremacists and extremists such as the US religious right or UK-based racist groups.

It's not about the Daily Mail, FFS.

she never loses I can't tell, are you quoting this with your tongue in cheek, or are you actually taken in by this narc nonsense?

She must have really said something that infuriated you. I mean seriously? Do you honestly think that this 'mantra' she repeats that she never loses is not a just a tongue in cheek confidence booster, but you believe it is a narcissistic bragging statement?

That says everything that any reader needs to know about how you interact with the world and how you interpret anything that she says.

I love how you ignore the bulk of what I've said just to one fixate on a catchphrase. I think you miss the point completely.

Would you like to qualify specifically who Kellie Jay Keen has 'worked' with that is 'far right'?

You're seeing what you want to see, instead of what is plainly before you.

Yes, it's a narcissistic brag.

If it walks like a duck...

And while you are answering that, perhaps you need to also qualify and define what 'worked with' means for us all, posters and readers.

Because if you mean 'worked with' as in has campaigned with, that is significant. If you mean 'worked with' as in had someone take a selfie with or allowed to use the open mic at an event or did an interview with, then you are again using guilt by association to attempt to strengthen your incredibly weak argument.

By the standard of 'did an interview with' then no journalist of any reputation will be able to put into any box. Because they should be interviewing everyone with impartiality and have all sorts of people on their shows that will bring viewer numbers. If they do their job professionally, their political views should not come into it. Even if it was a 'far right' activist who was interviewing someone, why would any person with critical thinking believe that the person being interviewed and the interviewer would share a political view? The world is fucked if that is the premise for 'interviews' today.

So, tell us all, please what 'working with' means so we can work out whether or not your claims have any factual basis at all or is just the same old 'guilt by association' as usual.

Yup, totally a duck.